gtafandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Sec 1971
Undo Reply There was no need to add some of the information you added (such as deceased after relatives names). Also, to be honest, I think that the article looks far better with the lists listed in that fashion. As for your comment on Wikia standards, this is GTA Wiki and not Wikia. And I'm that after almost three years here I'd have seen any such standards for GTW. Also, there is no real need for a personal attack. Finally, please add comments to the bottom of talk pages, not the top. Thank you. A-Dust 21:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC) :Did you happen to see the URL? It's gta.WIKIA.com! This is a wikia wiki, just like my Criminal Minds Wiki, and all of the others I edit. That's the way we format lists, all of the wikis do it that way (at the least the professional looking ones). -Sec_1971 22:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::Yes I am aware that this site is hosted by Wikia. However, this site has its own staff system and own policies, separate from Wikia, as has been seen by Wikia's attempt to move our Main Page, which was reverted. Discussions here have since decided to keep the Main Page at that name, and not to move it to the destination that Wikia want, because the community here should take precedence over Wikia every day of the week. A-Dust 22:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC) Line breaks I noticed your attempts to fix the broken mission appearances section on The Truth. The tags you were using would not work appropriately on all resolutions. A template tag would achieve what you were attempting. Either way, moving the mission appearances section below the image causes a huge ugly white space, so I've moved the images both right, which allows for an uninterrupted flow of the bulleted list. --GuildKnightTalk2me 23:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC) :Looks better. I was just trying to help the wiki look more professional, including putting the CJ infobox into list format (as opposed to this; that; other stuff) but it kept getting reverted. won't be editing here anymore, since A-dust seems to prefer things his own way, instead of discussing what looks better. I'll stick to CSI, Criminal Minds, and Terminator; where we work together... -Sec_1971 23:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::When your edit is reverted, it is inappropriate to re-edit the page. The professional course of action would be to begin a community discussion on the topic, perhaps on the character infobox talk page or another appropriate talk page. --GuildKnightTalk2me 23:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC) The professional thing to do would have been for him to say "This is the format we use here at this wiki", not "I think the article looks better this way..." It doesn't. It looks bad. A list in an infobox should be a list, not a paragraph. Even if a paragraph is preferred, items should be separated by commas, not semicolons. Semicolons are for adding an addendum to the end of a sentence; kind of like this. But, I can see by the attitudes of the sysops here that you're not open to criticism or any assistance whatsoever. So just go ahead and do everything your own way and ignore any suggestions from other editors. It is pointless to discuss anything on a talk page with people so close-minded. -Sec_1971 00:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC) :Sec, please don't take offence at the above comments or those elsewhere. This wiki has been going a long time, and was not originally at Wikia - we moved here when it was several years old. This is why we perhaps do things slightly differently. Whilst we do have our own ways and standards, we are always open to discussion and change. A lot of our policies are quite outdated, and there are better ways to do things. The best way to change the way we do something would be to discuss it on a talk page. What a lot of our editors (including staff) do is to create a new version of the page in their personal user space, so they can perfect it and show everyone a working alternative, without upsetting the consistency of the main articles. This allows anyone to have a go at suggesting things (without breaking important pages), and allows the community to spend time coming to an agreement, and a lot of people to join in. There's nothing that says you can't drastically change a real article, but the chances are that it will get reverted or undone if it appears to be inconsistent with our standards. Nobody here is questioning your wiki-editing capabiltiy, or indeed your grammar; but it doesn't help when you accuse the entire wiki of being unprofessional or 'wrong', just because our definition of free-editing is slightly different to yours. I urge you to be open-minded of our culture, and we shall be open-minded to yours. If you have an issue with certain actions of GTW staff, feel free to leave me a formal complaint and I shall look into it as a matter of urgency. Otherwise I urge all concerned to leave aside their differences and work together to make these pages they best they can be - by community consensus rather than tradition, convention or staff dictation. Gboyers talk 02:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)